 Y Prifyletwyd dientrion o'r cyfleidig gyda'r proffodus yng Nghymru i gael eu cwymell i'r bobl beth oedd ymgylch gyrfaedd ac energig. Lela i'r amgarwihau o'r cyfleidig a'r adael i gael eu cyfleidig gyda'r cyfleidig a'r cwestiynau i'r angrwihau oherwydd gyd attemptu geisio i gael ei fewn gwirionedd, ac i gael ei gael ei chweithrif i chweithi gwirionedd. Thank you, Deputy First Minister. To ask the Scottish Government what its position is on which rules and incentives are central to a wellbeing economy. As we transition to a wellbeing economy, we will maximise powers currently available to us to grow a fairer greener economy, seizing the opportunities of net zero, creating better communities, tackling poverty and embedding equality, inclusion and human rights in everything we do. Our national strategy for economic transformation and energy strategy, including our approach to fair work and conditionality, set out many of the actions and investments that we are taking forward to deliver that vision. We will continue to make the case that, with independence, we can do much more to realise our vision for a wellbeing economy. I thank the minister for that answer. A thriving local high street is vital to the wellbeing of communities and the economies in towns such as Dunbar, Haddington, Penicook, Melrose and right across the south of Scotland region. Can the minister explain in what way the decision to impose the disastrous deposit return scheme on cafes, pubs and restaurants is in any way sensible role making? How can this Government's abject failure to pass on the 75 per cent business rates relief to Scotland's hospitality and retail operators ever be viewed as an incentive for them to grow and invest in a wellbeing economy? First of all, the hospitality and tourism industries are represented on the new deal for business group that I co-chaired along with Dr Punam Malik last week. We are taking representations on the non-domestic rates situation. Obviously, we have a very generous non-domestic rates offering and the most generous small business bonus scheme anywhere in the UK, which helps to support our high streets. In terms of the deposit return scheme, obviously, we are looking to ensure that we develop a circular economy. That is important for our net zero journey, but it is also an economic opportunity if we can get recycling right. We have a huge commodity in Scotland, and making sure that we harness that and take it forward well is what one of the central aims of the deposit return scheme. To ask the Scottish Government what support it is giving to bring people with children back into work. Parental employment support seeks to increase parental income from employment. Our eligibility recognises different family structures such as kinship care or those who are parents but not living with their children. Responding to the fact that more than two thirds of children in poverty live in working households, we broadened eligibility to ensure parents in low income employment can access person-centred support to help them increase their income. We work with local partners promoting employment as a route out of poverty and attracting parents to the support available, ensuring that employment opportunities are fair and flexible to family circumstances. Can I ask if the cabinet secretary has discussions or engagement with private and public sector employers regarding utilising home working and separately provision where practicable, especially of the 1140 hours free nursery care and if it can be utilised by them? Yes. While the legal powers governing flexible working are reserved to the UK Government, we remain committed to improving access to flexible working for all sectors of the economy. We welcome the progress of the employment relations bill through the UK Parliament but feel it does not go far enough in giving all employees and their employers confidence that requests for flexible working will be given thorough consideration. Asking employers to offer flexible working from day one of employment has already been a requirement of our fair work first criteria on public spend since October 2021. Since August 2021, all councils have been offering 1140 hours of funded early learning and childcare to all eligible children. The most recent ELC census shows that over 92,500 children were accessing funded ELC across Scotland in 2022. The estimated update rate of funded ELC for three and four-year-olds is 99 per cent in 2022. We will continue to work closely with local government to embed the benefits of expansion as more families come forward, ensuring that childcare is flexible, affordable, accessible and high-quality. Private and voluntary nurseries are often able to offer a greater degree of flexibility of childcare hours than local authorities, which is especially important for shift workers like nurses. However, the funding model undermines the ability to retain experienced staff in the sector, especially during the middle cost of living crisis and increasing pay levels. When will we see a change to help those children who wish to return to work? I thank Beatrice Wishart for that question. I have received representation from the PVI sector. I know that Natalie Don has met representatives of the PVI sector to discuss just those issues that Beatrice Wishart raises. I am hoping to meet the PVI representative soon as well so that we can cement the fact that a strong childcare provision is central to our economic aspirations, and I will look to provide an update as soon as I can. To ask the Scottish Government what discussions the energy minister has had with ministerial colleagues regarding the recommendations to the Scottish Government contained in the report Our Power, Offshore Workers Demands for a Just Energy Transition. Scottish Government welcomes the report and agrees that listening to and acting on recommendations from offshore workers is critical to ensure the just transition. That is why we have provided £100,000 in funding to the STUC to ensure that workers' voices are at the very heart of our just transition planning. My colleague, the Cabinet Secretary for Just Transition and Net Zero, has been advised that the recommendations provided in the report will be considered in full during the consultation period of the energy strategy and just transition plan and responded to in the final draft. A range of ministers will continue working closely on that, as it requires cross-portfolio working and cross-sector working. I thank the minister for that response. The minister will be aware that a key demand from offshore workers in the Our Power report is for the Scottish Government to create an offshore training passport that aligns standards across the energy industry. That passport has already been delayed by the Government and just today the general secretary of the STUC warns the Government to get a grip of the transition. Can the minister reassure offshore workers and their trade unions that the energy skills passport will align offshore basic safety, sea survival and firefighting standards? I am looking for a cast iron guarantee from the Government on this point. Will those standards be aligned? Yes or no? I thank Mercedes Alba for bringing up the offshore skills passport. I want to say that the passport has not been delayed by the Government. It is an industry-led body that is taking the energy skills passport forward. The Government's place in that is helping to fund it. We have awarded £5 million from the Just Transition Fund to a petal who is leading on that for our digital energy skills passport. A key milestone in that was reached with the development of a prototype that I have seen. Mercedes Alba will know that, in addition to the report that she cites, I did my own report on this and it very much loud and clear that anything to do with an energy skills passport, the industry and sectors have to be at the heart of that. I am meeting with a petal next week to see what their progress is. The Energy Transition Report yesterday highlighted how damaging to a just energy transition this Government's demonising of the North Sea oil and gas industry is. Epitomised by Minister Patrick Harvie saying that only the hard right support new oil and gas. Does the Minister recognise that report's findings? Will she amend the energy strategy to stop the damage it's doing to our industry? Will she join us in supporting domestic oil and gas exploration and production? I thank Liam Kerr for that. I am smiling as he delivers that, because he knows full well that I have one foot very much in every part of the energy mix. My interest in keeping all the energy mix vibrant and working and employing people until we transition is very much something that I take a priority in. It refers to the energy strategy that has closed. The consultation on that has closed. It is going to be reported in the coming months. I am actively involved with my cabinet secretary in looking at that and with other cabinet secretaries as well and how we can give confidence to all energy sectors to know that the Scottish Government supports them and their workers fully. To ask the Scottish Government what action it has taken to expand community-owned energy. We want to realise as many opportunities as possible for community energy and lasting benefits for communities from the transition to net zero. Scotland has made good progress against its 2 gigawatt community and local energy target, and we continue to invest in cares, our community and renewable energy scheme, which has provided over £60 million in funding today for communities and supported shared ownership opportunities. We have recently commissioned research to explore how we maximise the contribution of community energy to a just transition, and that will involve future policy development on the support provided through cares. There is a target in the Government's draft energy strategy of the 2 gigawatts of community energy that the minister mentioned by 2030, but what is missing is that clear route map and actions to deliver on that target. The Scottish Corporate Party has set out 11 recommendations to double community energy from creating a new ring-fen Scottish national investment bank fund to include quotas for community energy when it comes to local authorities bulk buying energy. But what new measures do the Government plan and will the minister give careful consideration to the corporate party's proposals in the Government's final energy strategy? I thank Colin Smyth for that supplementary question. He almost could have been a fly in the wall in the meeting that the cabinet secretary and I have just been with the onshore wind strategic leadership group because this very much came up as an area of discussion in how we can be providing through cares more particularly legal and financial support to communities and building on the learning from other communities that have involved themselves in community energy projects to get more communities invested in this. I think that it's one of the ways in which we have to share learning because communities are obviously doing this on a voluntary basis and we need to give them as much support as possible. So very much is a live discussion, it's a discussion that's probably still going on. We had to leave that meeting to come and answer questions here today, but our partners in that group will be discussing that as well and we'll be reporting back on their recommendations. Recently, the British Irish Parliamentary Assembly Committee C, which is the energy committee, I'm part of that visited pen punt micro hydroscheme as part of our current energy inquiry. This scheme provides community energy to the local area and is a great example of how community owned energy works. Would the minister agree that we need to see more schemes like this pen punt micro hydroscheme rolled out and will she agree to visit pen punt to meet with a development trust to secure the project? I thank Emma Harper very much for that, particularly the last part of her comments that she had a bit invited me to visit because I was going to say before she said that I would actually like to visit that project as well because I think I come back to what I said in response to Colin Smyth that it's about learning from other communities that have been through this process and how we can actually build on the support that's given and make it streamlined, make it better, make it more supportive for communities that are yet to make that investment. To ask the Scottish Government how it is supporting public bodies to implement fair work principles. Thank you. Public bodies and their spending power are key to making Scotland a leading fair work nation. We have developed fair work first guidance to all employers. This includes specific advice for public bodies. We have engaged extensively with them on removing barriers for racialised minorities following the Scottish Parliament Equalities and Human Rights Committee's 2020 report into race equality employment and skills. We recognise the important dual role public bodies play as employers and stewards of public funds. Working with Scottish Enterprise, we have developed an online support tool for employers to benchmark fair work practices and receive tailored advice and resources. Colleges are public sector organisations and are expected to abide by the principles of fair work too. The City of Glasgow College is undertaking a series of compulsory redundancies and they are doing so in the absence of any guidance on good higher education governance. The website said for weeks now that the publication is imminent, so can the cabinet secretary confirm when that will be? I hope that that would come forward in due course, but of course for Labour to be taken seriously with regard to fair work, they need to have some consistency. Pam Duncan Glancy is quite rightly standing up for employers at Glasgow College. At Westminster this week, we had the spectacle of more than 30 Labour party members abstaining from the anti-strike legislation that came forward on Monday. Even on workers' rights, nobody knows where Labour stands when Sir Keir Starmer couldn't even be there to vote on that legislation, which included an amendment that would have seen Scotland exempted from that legislation. There are interesting developments in the fair work space happening around the world, mechanisms to break contracts and withdraw funding if poor labour conditions, data breaches or environmental offences are identified. Germany's supply chain due diligence act that holds companies legally responsible for human rights abuses in their supply chain and so on. The cabinet secretary will know well my support for tight pay ratios to close inequality gaps. Within devolved powers, what more can we do to ensure public money does not go to those with very wide pay ratios and those who don't pay sick pay or holiday pay for hourly contracted staff? I thank Maggie Chapman for that question. With employment law reserved, there are limits on the actions that we can take. However, we are committed to using all the levers available to drive fair work across Scotland. We already apply fair work first criteria to affect the positive change that we want to see through public sector funding. We committed in the bute house agreement and NSET to developing our approach to conditionality within the constraints of devolved competence. That will be a key focus for the next phase when the real living wage and effective worker voice conditionality in grants is fully rolled out after July. Public sector funding should lever in wider benefits, including the promotion of fair work to support a sustainable and successful wellbeing economy over the long term. 7. Marie McNair To ask the Scottish Government what recent assessment is made of the impact of Brexit on Scottish businesses. Scottish businesses continue to be held back by the UK Government's disastrous Brexit policy. The latest business insights and conditions survey shows that the Scottish businesses facing challenges with exporting in April, 44 per cent blame Brexit directly. Red tape, bureaucracy and uncertainty have become the hallmarks of Brexit with the UK experiencing the worst exports recovery in the G7. What's more, Brexit has also contributed to labour shortages and recruitment challenges in key sectors such as healthcare, transport and hospitality. Study after study finds Brexit is bad for trade, bad for productivity, bad for the cost of living and bad for business. I thank the cabinet secretary for the answer. Brexit is feeling businesses and damaging our economy, even the old Brexit party. The leader, Nigel Farage, says that it's failed. Does the cabinet secretary share my concerns that leaders of the new Brexit party, Keir Starmer and Aras Sarwar don't even have the courage or vision to abandon Brexit? Given that 70 per cent of Scots think that Brexit is a disaster, they don't even need to leave. They should just follow and reverse Labour support for it. Either contender for the leader of the next Westminster Government in Keir Starmer or Rishi Sunak or the Scottish counterparts in Aras Sarwar or Douglas Ross are willing to admit the extent of the Brexit disaster. However, while Labour and the Conservatives tried to sweep this mess under the rug, violating the will of the people of Scotland, this Government understands that the only way to repair the damage is to change course, rejoin the EU, and if the UK Government does it, whichever stripe comes next, then an independent Scotland will. Border effects reduce trade by as much as a third. That's what a 2017 meta-analysis conducted by University of Michigan concluded. Indeed, we may be seeing empirical evidence from Brexit, which we didn't support. Has the Scottish Government asked the chief economist to form a view on the impact of border effects? How much of Scotland's 60 per cent of outward trade that goes to the rest of the UK, with more than £50 billion, would we lose if a border was imposed between Scotland and the rest of the UK? I'm looking forward to meeting Daniel Johnson in the coming weeks, as I've offered to all front-bench spokespeople across the chamber, so that I can share with him the economy prospectus paper, which has many of the answers to those questions within them. Of course, we currently have Mr Johnson... Excuse me, could we listen to the minister's response? Mr Johnson can see within the report the plans that we have for cross-border trade, which of course are being hampered right now because of Brexit. Because of the barriers that have been put up by the UK Government, we're looking to tear down 27 barriers to trade with the rest of the EU, and the only independence can deliver that. The minister really can't have it both ways. Breaking up is bad. Breaking up the United Kingdom would be bad, just like breaking up the European Union would be bad. Why can't the minister get that? He's talking nonsense. Cabinet Secretary? No, there are huge opportunities that come from independence. There are huge opportunities. I've spoken about the 27 barriers to trade that are currently in place because of Brexit. Of course, there would be challenges in terms of cross-border trade with the rest of the UK, but the opportunity that we have with the market that there is within the EU that is currently being held back, that businesses that I've already cited are showing that 44 per cent of businesses are citing Brexit as the reason behind that. We want to reverse that. The only way we know Labour and the Tories are on the same page on this regard is Brexit and our relationship with the European Union. Only independence delivers us the reversal of Brexit and an independent Scotland rejoin in the European Union. That concludes portfolio questions on wellbeing, economy, fair work and energy, and there will be a very short pause to allow front-bench teams to change positions before we move to the next portfolio questions. The next portfolio is finance and parliamentary business. As ever, if a member wishes to ask a supplementary question, they should press the request-to-speak buttons during the relevant question. There is quite a bit of interest in supplementaries, so again the plea of brevity in questions and in responses. I call question number one, Ariane Burgess. To ask the Scottish Government what is responses to the STUC's proposals for a local wealth tax. We welcome the STUC's report and acknowledge its important contribution to the debate on tax policy. We believe in a fair and progressive approach to taxation for those most able to afford it and contribute more to sustaining public services. We are also committed to a fair and ffiscally sustainable form of local taxation. Ariane Burgess. In Bucky, Spacide, Elgin and Forest, half of the land available for housing is owned by just five landowners. Does the minister agree with me that the land and wealth taxes highlighted in the report could be a useful tool for tackling unequal land ownership, increasing the number of homes in rural areas and capturing for public benefit a share of the increase in land value that occurs when development is supported through the planning system? The Scottish Government recognises that tax could be an important mechanism in addressing land ownership patterns and influencing the market. We are currently reviewing the evidence provided in response to our recent consultation on the land reform bill and will assess this separately as part of our wider approach to tax policy. That will include consideration of representations from stakeholders for a land value tax. However, I note that the Scottish Government's ability to implement such a tax is constrained by the devolution settlement and that the Scottish Land Commission and its advice to the Scottish Government did not propose a single land value tax. Can I ask the minister what plans the Scottish Government is putting in place to carry out a review of the efficacy of the whole tax system in Scotland, given the warnings that are set out by the Scottish Fiscal Commission in its recent sustainability report? We continually keep our policies on taxation under review. We take decisions as part of the annual budget process. Indeed, we are committed through our new deal with local government to further collaboration and engagement with local government on local taxation, and the Deputy First Minister will be carrying out further engagement on tax over the summer months details of which will be provided in due course. 2. Morton Whitfield I am very grateful, Deputy Presiding Officer, to ask the Scottish Government whether it will propose scheduling parliamentary time to debate the potential role of artificial intelligence in the scrutiny of legislation. Minister George Adam Thank you, Presiding Officer, and I thank the member for the question. I am happy to be able to say to Mr Whitfield that a debate on artificial intelligence is scheduled for Thursday 1 June. That will provide him with an opportunity to contribute his views on the issue. Any use of AI would have to ensure that all are aware of the public politicians and stakeholders agree and are aware of the AI use. More importantly, we do not find ourselves all replaced in some kind of dystopian future, but all joking aside, it is important to note that the Scottish Parliament scrutifies all legislation. I encourage you to ignore the sedentary interventions from Mr Johnson and Martin Whitfield. I am very grateful to the minister for that response. I have now discovered the power of submitting a question to portfolio to get a debate. However, the question of AI is very important. The First Minister met the convener's group only earlier today and talked about being very open to committees asking about better scrutiny of legislation. What has the Scottish Government done to engage with AI in the creation of legislation, in reaching out to people that legislation may affect, and indeed to the drafting of that legislation? The Government considers it important to ensure that scrutiny remains sufficiently flexible to enable the Parliament to hold Government to account in an efficient and effective manner. As I said previously, the public and partners would need to be agreeable and not surprise of any kind of future use of AI in any shape or form. The technology would have to be in such a place where we could actually be pretty consistent and be able to trust said technology to deliver for us. However, I recognise that parliamentary scrutiny should evolve as technology develops and I therefore will be interested to hear more about how AI might play a part in that in due course. To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to the latest data, reportedly showing that a majority of Scottish taxpayers now pay higher income tax than those elsewhere in the United Kingdom. According to the Scottish Fiscal Commissions, December forecast, 52 per cent of Scottish taxpayers will pay slightly less income tax in 2023-24 than if they lived elsewhere in the UK for the consecutive year. The commission will publish updated forecasts, incorporating the latest economic data alongside the medium-term financial strategy tomorrow. We have always prioritised a fair and progressive approach to taxation, one that balances the need to raise revenue with the impact on households and the economy. For income tax, that has seen additional revenue raised for the Scottish budget with lower earners protected from higher taxes. I thank the cabinet secretary for her response, but I fear that the data that she is quoting from the Fiscal Commission is now out of date, given that the most recent data shows that anyone earning over £27,850, now the majority of Scots are paying more tax. I commend to her the very interesting article in the Herald newspaper this morning by her former ministerial colleague Ivan McKee, a member of the Government in Waiting on the Back Benches, in which he argues for the Scottish Government to make Scotland a more attractive place for workers to come from other parts of the United Kingdom—something that we would all agree with. Yet, we all hear from the business community, particularly those in sectors such as finance, the difficulties that they have in encouraging people to come here because of differential tax rates. How can we attract more people to come and work here when they feel that they are being punished with higher taxes to make up for SNP waste and financial mismanagement? First of all, each year we publish the distribution analysis of our income tax policy to transparently set out the impacts, and that is all there for everyone to see. Of course, the median wage for 2023-24 is used in this analysis to rise, of course, from the independent forecasts from the Scottish Fiscal Commission. What is clear from the IFS analysis is that households with children in approximately the bottom third of the income distribution in Scotland will gain around £1,200 per year as a result of our tax and social security policy. At the end of the day, that is all about choices. Had we followed the choices of Murdo Fraser, who, of course, backed Liz Truss and emulated the same tax-cutting policies, he knows that we would have had hundreds of millions of pounds less available for public spending. On his final point, Scotland continues to see consistent positive net inward migration from the rest of the UK. Those are the facts that stand in contrast to the assertion that Murdo Fraser made earlier on. We will continue to make sure that we balance the needs of households with the needs of public services. We will continue to do that. Through this summer, I will engage with people from a range of organisations in order to ensure that we listen to those views as we go towards setting the tax policy for next year's budget. Of course, I am happy to engage with any suggestions from Murdo Fraser and his colleagues, but the budget has to balance. Of course, as he knows, many of his colleagues come here asking for more money. In any tax policies put forward by the Tories, that has to balance with the availability of resources for public spending. I am going to need a bit more brevity in responses as well as the questions. I agree that it appears for the Conservatives that the ideal world would be no tax, no schools, no hospitals and no roads. If we want all of these things, then we need tax, and tax is inherently a good thing. Absolutely. It is the case that the investment in public services resulting from our tax policy makes a vital contribution towards making Scotland a great place to live, work and do business. Of course, we have access to a wide range of social security payments and public services that go significantly beyond what is provided in other parts of the UK, including free higher education, free prescriptions or indeed our flagship Scottish child payment. Of course, the Scottish Fiscal Commission has estimated that our income tax policy will raise £1 billion of additional revenue in 2023-24. If the Tories want to put that at risk, they need to tell us what will be cut with a different tax approach. To ask the Scottish Government what impact it anticipates that its taxation policy, including in relation to businesses, will have on the strength of the economy. The strong economy is vital to ensuring that the benefits of our tax policy choices are fully realised, and that is why we launched our national strategy for economic transformation in March 2022 to create a greener, fairer and more inclusive wellbeing economy. Alongside that, our new deal for Scottish business will provide an opportunity to discuss how tax policy can support businesses, our communities and grow the Scottish economy. We will continue to prioritise a fair and progressive approach to our tax policy and carefully consider the impacts of our policies on taxpayers, households and businesses. I thank the minister for that response. Scottish businesses face a real struggle in Scotland. Despite the businesses' rates re-evaluation, Scottish retail, hospitality and leisure businesses still face tax bills thousands of pounds higher than their English counterparts. That is because the SNP refused to provide the same discount that is available down south. Does the minister accept that the lack of business rates makes it harder to do business in Scotland than elsewhere in the United Kingdom, especially when the base poundage rate is only 0.1 pence lower than in England? I thank the member for highlighting the basic property rate, which is indeed lower. It responded to what was the number one ask of business organisations ahead of the budget, which was a freeze on the poundage. Decisions on non-domestic rates and non-domestic rates relief are, of course, taken in the round at budget time and are set against the context of the priorities that we undertake to deliver on through the budget. I note that around half of RHL properties pay no rates because they fall below the threshold for the small business bonus scheme, the most generous of its type, in the United Kingdom. It follows on from questions that were raised earlier. If the Conservatives wish to see a future budget that is further relief provided for a particular sector, I would be keen to hear where they choose to obtain that funding from. Where would be the corresponding budget reduction? We commit all of our consequentials in total in sum towards the priorities that we set out at the budget. If members wish to see tax cuts, that would cost money. If they wish to see more money for local government, that would cost money. If they wish to see further relief for non-domestic rates, that would cost money to Governors to choose, and that is nowhere more apparent in when we set budgets. If the Conservative Government in the United Kingdom is entitled to set their policies, we are entitled to set our policies in this Parliament and if the Conservatives is an opposition party who wants to engage constructively, I am more than happy to do so. However, they cannot just ask for spend, they have to identify what the corresponding reduction would be. Again, we need greater brevity in particular the responses at the moment. I have two supplementaries. If they are brief, I will get them both in Bill Kidd first. Thank you, Presiding Officer. We are aware of the significant impacts of Tory tax policy and the economy, especially following the disastrous mini-budget last October. What assessments has the Scottish Government made of the impact of those decisions on Scotland's economy? Can we agree that business and our economy more generally would be better served with full fiscal powers line with this Parliament? The persistent high inflation and the cost of living crisis are causing unprecedented drops in living standards. Brexit and fiscal instability brought on by UK Government decisions have made these problems worse. I recognise entirely that we are operating within broad global economic challenges, but Brexit, a policy choice, a hard Brexit, a clear policy choice by the UK Government, supported by the Labour Party, has reflected untold damage on our economy. It is compounding the impacts that all countries are facing, and it is ultimately a consequence of reckless decision making by the UK Government. If we want to find ourselves in a position where we are no longer subject to Governments that we did not vote for taking decisions against our interests, then I am afraid that the only means that we will achieve that is for Scotland becoming an independent country. Thanks, Presiding Officer. A change that would benefit our struggling high streets would be to bring down the higher rate of non-domestic rates in line with England, so when will we see this change? We have taken action following the Barclay view to move towards that. We introduced the intermediate property relief a number of years ago, which has significantly reduced the number of businesses subject to the higher property relief. We have increased the threshold from £95,000 to £100,000 most recently, and we are committed to, as per our manifest commitment, to achieve that parity over the course of this parliamentary term. Scottish Government, what are its responses to the reported concerns of Edinburgh City Council that it could still be two years away from having the powers to implement a transient visitor levy? As part of the Government's priorities for Scotland, announced by the First Minister on 18 April, we are committed to delivering, subject to Parliament's agreement, legislation giving councils the power to apply visitor levy if they choose to do so. Once any bill is introduced, the timetable for its consideration is, of course, a matter for Parliament. Can I thank the minister for that answer? I have been calling for a levy for years now, and it is frustrating to see how long it is taking to get this action from the Scottish Government. The minister will be aware that many cities in Europe successfully operate visitor levies. The City of Edinburgh Council has very well developed plans to implement a levy, and it estimates that approximately £15 million a year could be raised to help fund vital local services. Will the minister meet me and Edinburgh City Council to discuss the levy in detail and make sure that Edinburgh and indeed other areas that it wants to in Scotland can implement those measures as soon as it has the power to do so? I am also supportive of a local visitor levy in Edinburgh, as are many organisations, including from the business community. However, good implementation and development are important, so does the minister agree that it is vital to take the appropriate and necessary time to take a bill through Parliament and then give relevant councils who wish to utilise that power and stakeholders adequate time to prepare and effectively administer and collect a levy? Absolutely. I agree entirely with Mr MacPherson, and I would want to pay tribute to Ben MacPherson for the work that he undertook as public finance minister prior to the pandemic and his engagement with local authorities on that particular measure. Once the bill is introduced to Parliament, I will be delighted to engage with all members and indeed local authorities in doing so. Of course, a rigorous parliamentary scrutiny will be important to ensure that the legislation that is ultimately put before Parliament for a final vote is as robust as it can and should be. I am going to call Miles Briggs, but with a reminder that members need to be in the start of portfolio questions, they can sometimes finish early, but it is role on business. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. Does the minister believe that there may be a link between Edinburgh City Council being the only council that is looking to take forward tourist tax and the fact that Edinburgh City Council receives the lowest level of funding per head of population from the Government? I would not want to presume to speak on the half of Edinburgh City Council, but I would recognise that Edinburgh City is not just a premier tourist destination for Scotland of indeed the UK, but is a premier tourist destination for the world, and that is something that we should all be proud of. Question 6. To ask the Scottish Government how much it has allocated in its budget 2023-24 for the roll-out of free school meals to all primary school pupils. The 23-24 budget has made provision for £185.8 million to be allocated to local authorities for free school meals. The funding supports our universal free school meal offer for all pupils in primaries 1-5, as well as meals for eligible pupils from P6 to S6. It will also support the next phase of our expansion programme, which will see free school meals being made available to all pupils in primaries 6 and 7 in receipt of the Scottish child payment. I thank the cabinet secretary for the answer. When I asked the then cabinet secretary for education in March, she recognised in a quote that a number of local authorities are facing challenges in planning for that substantial expansion of free school meals. Can the cabinet secretary outline what direct support is going where in the provision to councils to overcome such challenges? Has she given consideration to calls by organisations such as Aberlour, which asks the Government to increase the eligibility threshold beyond the already promised extension to P6 and P7 in order to support low-income families? The cabinet secretary rightly points to some of the complexities around planning for the substantial expansion of free school meals, particularly around the kitchen and dining facilities that are required to support that. Of course, it is not a universal picture, so some schools have more challenges than others. A lot of work has been undertaken to understand that and to make sure that the resources are going to the places that they need to go to. I hope that Carol Morgan will agree that that is a sensible set of arrangements. It is right that the expansion is focused on all pupils in primaries 6 and 7 in receipt of the Scottish child payment. I understand the position of Aberlour, but we have to do this in a way that is deliverable and affordable. That is the best place to start as we continue with our commitment to expand free school meals to all primaries 6 and 7. Of course, we are still committed to the pilot in secondary schools as well. Most secondary schools use a cashless payment system. It is difficult for school meal debt to accrue in those settings. What steps is the Government taking to assess the true level of hidden hunger in secondary schools and to assess the implementation of school meal debt management guidance that was rolled out earlier this year? We would rely on local authorities to make sure that they are feeding back any issues in relation to the guidance. We will continue to work with local authorities to see if any improvements can be made. They obviously have the flexibility around dealing with the debt in individual cases, and we would encourage them to do so. Ultimately, it will be for local authorities to advise us if there are any issues particularly pertaining to the guidance. Question 7, Ruth Maguire. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on implementation of the Planning Scotland Act 2019. We have recently implemented substantial elements of the 2019 Planning Act to strengthen Scotland's plan-led planning system. That has included adoption on 13 February of the national planning framework 4. Just last week, regulations came into force, which implemented the new approach to planning authorities' production of stronger, evidence-based and place-focused local development plans to shape future developments across Scotland. We are now turning our attention to the implementation of the remaining aspects of the act, including the forthcoming appointment of a new national planning improvement champion. Ruth Maguire. I thank the minister for that answer on Monday, which was incidentally UN biodiversity day. I visited Ardear Peninsula with the community council and friends of Ardear. The special development order that I amended the planning bill to revoke a number of years ago remains in place, and development and commercial activity on the peninsula are not subject to the usual planning protections. A sand dune system has been destroyed for commercial gain. It is a devastating loss of important ecological habitat. I understand the complexity of the matter of revocation and appreciate competing rights and interests of community, commerce and public bodies. However, inaction is not an option. Will the minister meet me with a view to resolving the matter sooner rather than later? I am aware of the specific and complex circumstances at Ardear and the implications for the planning of the area, particularly resulting from the special development order in force. I am also aware that Ms Maguire has written to me on this. She will not yet have received my response, but I will be happy to meet her to discuss the matter in detail. Across the north-east, communities are struggling with planning issues. Tory and Aberdeen might be about to lose a bi-diverse green space in its last community park to development. In Angus, a crematorium is planned on agricultural land without appropriate transport connections and other amenities to deal with increased capacity and activity. How can the Scottish Government ensure that local authorities are following the MPF for principles and guidance and doing all they can to protect communities' wellbeing and safeguarding nature? Members will appreciate that I cannot comment on any individual development proposals to be considered through the planning system. However, following its adoption in February, MPF4 took on a new statutory development plan status alongside local development plans. That means that all decision makers are required under the planning act to determine applications in accordance with the development plan, including MPF4, unless there are material planning considerations that justify a departure from the plan. We are monitoring the impact of MPF4 and its policies as part of a programme of work to support its delivery. To ask the Scottish Government when it last met the Chancellor of the Exchequer and what was discussed. The most recent meeting between the Scottish Government and the Chancellor of the Exchequer was at a meeting of the Prime Minister and the heads of the devolved Governments on 10 November 2022 when the economic outlook and impact of rising inflation were discussed. I had an introductory meeting with the chief secretary to the treasury on 2 May and we will meet him again at the upcoming finance inter-ministerial standing committee meeting on 22 June. I would welcome a meeting with the Chancellor himself to discuss the economic challenges facing Scotland and the constraints placed upon the Scottish Government's finances. I will also encourage the UK Government to do more to provide support to people and businesses during this difficult economic period. I thank the cabinet secretary for her answer and given in particular the ongoing negative impacts of high inflation on Scotland's fixed budget, of course the need I would say for fiscal flexibility such as normal borrowing powers is ever more pressing to manage risk and to support economic recovery. Can the cabinet secretary therefore advise on whether the UK Government is in fact on Scotland's side here? Of course Annabelle Ewing is quite right to mention the impact of inflation, which of course is being felt very much in the budget as a block grant at the time that the budget was set was 4.8 lower in real terms than it was in 2021-22. The fixed nature of the budget means that we have to redirect money from other priorities to pay for things like increased public sector pay deals. I have made it clear to the UK Government the need for greater flexibility and borrowing powers to enable us to manage risks and support economic recovery. We have consistently made the case for additional funding in my recent meeting with the CST. I stress the need for further clarity on what consequentials we can expect, for example from NHS pay in England. While the UK Government has rejected our previous calls for greater fiscal flexibility, we remain in constructive discussions on the wider fiscal framework review. That concludes portfolio questions. There will be a brief pause before we move to the next item of business to allow front benches to change.